Robert Buchholz wrote: > On Saturday 13 June 2009, Sebastian Pipping wrote: >> One of the stronger points for collaborating at the source is that >> poeple who are not Gentoo devs (yet) and therefore have no write >> access to the Gentoo tree can still extend and fix the Gentoo >> packagemap entries. Doing it downstream would hurt the whole project >> in several ways. > > To drive the project forward and find cross-distro acceptance, the > packagemap repo/server has to be the authorative source of information > for distributions that participate. > > However, I see advantages in a distributed model to collect the > information. Gentoo developers could feed <cpe> tags into the > metadata.xml of the tree and do not need to sign up to commit to the > third-party packagemap repository. Synchronizing changed tags to the > packagemap repository should be easy to automate. Changes in the > repository could be propagated back to the tree by a designated team of > Gentoo developers interested in the packagemap project. > > I have a feeling other distributions might also favor a model where they > have more control about the data without giving all their devs access > to one big repo.
Paul Wise of Debian also articulated interest in doing database building at distro level, so that's one more point /for/ your feeling. However there are a few more things to take into account, please have a look at my reply to Paul: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/popcon-developers/2009-June/001759.html Sorry for not CC'ing you, I should have though of that. Thinking the other way around: Is there anything we could do to make the central place approach work and feel better for everybody? Sebastian
